Sports potential modeling of young basketball players: a preliminary analysis

Abstract

The aims of this study were: 1) to evaluate the sports potential of young basketball players; 2) to identify variables that discriminate sports potential assessed by coaches; 3) to verifythe relationship between classification of the multidimensional profile of athletes and classification of the sports potential by coaches. Sixty-two young basketball players aged 15.6±1.1 years from U-15 (n = 24) and U-17 (n = 38) categories participated in the study. A test battery was applied to evaluate sports potential indicators: 1) anthropometric; 2) physicomotor; 3) psychological;4) skills;5) socio-environmental;6) maturational and 7) sports potential.Clusteranalysis was performed in three groups: high, medium and low potential. Student’s t-test was used for the comparison between athletes evaluated by the coach as excellent and the others and the Chi-Square test to verify the relationship between sports potential classifications. It was observed that in the high-potential group, athletes were chronologically older, with higher % predicted adult height (PMS), competitive and determined sports orientation, higher body size, lower skinfold summation, and greater physicomotor performance. In comparison with other athletes, high-potential basketball players presented higher stature, wider wingspan,longer limb length, greater predicted adult stature and higher Z score of the % PMS. It could be concluded that the multidimensional approach was useful for the evaluation of the sports potential of young basketball players, requiring the use of multidimensional variables, in addition to coaches’ opinion regarding the potential of their athletes.

From Talent Identification to Novo Basquete Brasil (NBB): Multifactorial Analysis of the Career Progression in Youth Brazilian Elite Basketball

“…The model observed a higher probability of reaching the NBB in athletes with the following characteristic combination: chronologically younger and taller, who play for clubs in the southeast region, are selected for the first time to play U22, not playing U15 national championship, have been re-selected to play the youth national basketball championships, and over time have changed playing position, club, and region. The current understanding is that multidisciplinary and dynamic approach must be used to assess sport potential (Ribeiro Júnior et al, 2019 ) and development (Sáenz-López et al, 2005 ) of young basketball players. Talent development and expertise must be taken into account with a wide range of factors (Gulbin et al, 2013 ; Hambrick et al, 2016 ).…”

“…In cross-sectional and short-term longitudinal studies, stature (Zarić et al, 2020 ), birthdate (Torres-Unda et al, 2013 ; Rubajczyk et al, 2017 ), maturation (Arede et al, 2019 ), physical fitness (Hoffman et al, 1996 ; Hoare, 2000 ), and skills (Arede et al, 2019 ) can be useful to predict individual performance and the selection of young basketball athletes. Thus, a more holistic and ecological analysis is considered an advance in the talent identification and development process to provide additional insight in the sport potential of the players (Moxley and Towne, 2015 ; Ribeiro Júnior et al, 2019 ). Hence, young athletes who present the right combination of characteristics required for good performance in basketball will probably have a greater chance of success.…”

Relationship Between Talent Identification and Change of Direction in Young Basketball Players

“…Thus, the dribbling deficit provides a more isolated measure of dribbling speed than tests using total performance times (Scanlan et al, 2018) However, it has been mentioned how important it is to involve the coach in TID too. In this regard, (Junior, Vianna, Lauria, Coelho, & Werneck, 2019) reported that coach evaluation is essential and should be part of the TID process. Coaches' performance during years of training can influence TID due to the time spent and the environment involving the player (Roberts et al, 2021).…”